‘Jailhouse lawyer’ loses retaliation suit over prison transfer

An inmate with a reputation as a jailhouse lawyer failed to convince a federal appeals court that his transfer from a medium-security prison in Pennsylvania to a maximum-security prison in Massachusetts constituted retaliation.

Francis Hannon, sentenced to life for murder, served for many years in Pennsylvania prisons. He acquired the reputation as an inmate who would file numerous grievances on behalf of himself and other inmates. Prison officials said he would encourage other inmates to file baseless claims. Despite this reputation, he had no disciplinary actions taken against him between 1987 and 2001, when a Pennsylvania prison transferred him to another state’s penal system under the Interstate Corrections Compact, which allows states to move prisoners to other states for payment.

A letter from a Pennsylvania prison official to a colleague in Massachusetts read in part: “He is more of what you call a nuisance. … He consistently functions as a ‘jailhouse lawyer’ and spends the majority of his time working on personal legal matters and acting as an inmate representative for other inmates at misconduct hearings.”

After he was relocated in Massachusetts, Hannon sued Pennsylvania prison officials in federal court. He contended that officials transferred him in retaliation for his grievances and advocacy on behalf of other inmates. The case has a lengthy procedural history in part because of the jurisdictional issue of whether Hannon could sue in federal court in Massachusetts.

Eventually, a federal district court in Massachusetts rejected the substance of Hannon’s First Amendment claim, finding that he established “no affirmative evidence” of a retaliatory motive.

On appeal, a three-judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed June 8 in Hannon v. Beard (followed by minor corrections). The 1st Circuit panel explained that prisoners alleging retaliation must show three things: (1) protected activity; (2) an adverse action; and (3) a causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse action. The panel noted that Hannon had established the first two points, because filing grievances is First Amendment-protected activity and a transfer from a medium- to a maximum-security prison is an adverse action.

However, the appeals court said Hannon had failed to show a close enough connection between the two. The panel found that the basis for Hannon’s transfer was that he had accumulated numerous “separations” — a prison term used to indicate that an inmate had had a conflict with other inmates or prison staff. For example, if Hannon filed a grievance against a guard, that might create a “separation” — meaning it would be wiser for Hannon not to be located in the same institution with that guard.

The 1st Circuit said the motivation for the transfer was legitimate because it focused on the number of separations Hannon had accumulated.

Hannon had argued that the letter from Pennsylvania to Massachusetts prison officials calling him a “nuisance” and referring to his jailhouse lawyering was evidence of retaliation.

The 1st Circuit rejected this argument. “We add that being called a ‘nuisance’ — a term used in the Letter — is not, in context, proof of retaliation. The plaintiff’s activities in organizing other inmates and manipulating them clearly justified this dysphemism. Furthermore, the plaintiff offers no competent evidence to show that this term referred to his First Amendment protected activities.”

The appeals court concluded that Hannon, who has since been moved again to a prison in New Jersey, “has failed to furnish a factual basis sturdy enough to support a reasonable inference of retaliatory animus.”

The First Amendment Center is an educational organization and cannot provide legal advice.

Ken Paulson is president of the First Amendment Center and dean of the College of Mass Communication at Middle Tennessee State University. He is also the former editor-in-chief of USA Today.

Gene Policinski, chief operating officer of the Newseum Institute, also is senior vice president of the First Amendment Center, a center of the institute. He is a veteran journalist whose career has included work in newspapers, radio, television and online.

John Seigenthaler founded the Newseum Institute’s First Amendment Center in 1991 with the mission of creating national discussion, dialogue and debate about First Amendment rights and values.

About The First Amendment Center

We support the First Amendment and build understanding of its core freedoms through education, information and entertainment.

The center serves as a forum for the study and exploration of free-expression issues, including freedom of speech, of the press and of religion, and the rights to assemble and to petition the government.

Founded by John Seigenthaler, the First Amendment Center is an operating program of the Freedom Forum and is associated with the Newseum and the Diversity Institute. The center has offices in the John Seigenthaler Center at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn., and at the Newseum in Washington, D.C.

The center’s website, www.firstamendmentcenter.org, is one of the most authoritative sources of news, information and commentary in the nation on First Amendment issues. It features daily updates on news about First Amendment-related developments, as well as detailed reports about U.S. Supreme Court cases involving the First Amendment, and commentary, analysis and special reports on free expression, press freedom and religious-liberty issues. Support the work of the First Amendment Center.

1 For All

1 for All is a national nonpartisan program designed to build understanding and support for First Amendment freedoms. 1 for All provides teaching materials to the nation’s schools, supports educational events on America’s campuses and reminds the public that the First Amendment serves everyone, regardless of faith, race, gender or political leanings. It is truly one amendment for all. Visit 1 for All at http://1forall.us/

Help tomorrow’s citizens find their voice: Teach the First Amendment

The most basic liberties guaranteed to Americans – embodied in the 45 words of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution – assure Americans a government that is responsible to its citizens and responsive to their wishes.

These 45 words are as alive and important today as they were more than 200 years ago. These liberties are neither liberal nor conservative, Democratic nor Republican – they are the basis for our representative democratic form of government.

We know from studies beginning in 1997 by the nonpartisan First Amendment Center, and from studies commissioned by the Knight Foundation and others, that few adult Americans or high school students can name the individual five freedoms that make up the First Amendment.

The lesson plans – drawn from materials prepared by the Newseum and the First Amendment Center – will draw young people into an exploration of how their freedoms began and how they operate in today’s world. Students will discuss just how far individual rights extend, examining rights in the school environment and public places. The lessons may be used in history and government, civics, language arts and journalism, art and debate classes. They may be used in sections or in their entirety. Many of these lesson plans indicate an overall goal, offer suggestions on how to teach the lesson and list additional resources and enrichment activities.

First Amendment Moot Court Competition

This site no longer is being updated … And the competition itself is moving to Washington, D.C., where the Newseum Institute’s First Amendment Center is co-sponsoring the “Seigenthaler-Sutherland Cup National First Amendment Moot Court Competition,” March 18-19, in partnership with the Columbus School of Law, of the Catholic University of America.

During the two-day competition in February, each team will participate in a minimum of four rounds, arguing a hypothetical based on a current First Amendment controversy before panels of accomplished jurists, legal scholars and attorneys.

FIRST AMENDMENT CENTER ARCHIVES

State of the First Amendment survey reports

The State of the First Amendment surveys, commissioned since 1997 by the First Amendment Center and Newseum, are a regular check on how Americans view their first freedoms of speech, press, assembly, religion and petition.

The periodic surveys examine public attitudes toward freedom of speech, press, religion and the rights of assembly and petition; and sample public opinion on contemporary issues involving those freedoms.
See the reports.